Addressing Community Gang Problems A Model

S
G OVC
RA
MS
DE
PA
N
BJ A C E
I
OF F
Office of Justice Programs
NT OF J
ME
US
RT
CE
TI
U.S. Department of Justice
IJ
J
O F OJJ D P B RO
J US T I C E P
Bureau of Justice Assistance
Addressing Community
Gang Problems: A Model
for Problem Solving
Monograph
U.S. Department of Justice

810 Seventh Street NW.
Washington, DC 20531
Janet Reno
Attorney General
Raymond C. Fisher
Associate Attorney General
Laurie Robinson
Assistant Attorney General
Nol Brennan
Deputy Assistant Attorney General
Nancy E. Gist
Director, Bureau of Justice Assistance
World Wide Web Home Page
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov
World Wide Web Home Page
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA
For grant and funding information contact
U.S. Department of Justice Response Center
18004216770
This document was prepared by the Police Executive Research Forum, supported by
cooperative agreement number 91DDCXK058, awarded by the Bureau of Justice
Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions,
findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this document are those
of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the
U.S. Department of Justice.
The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also
includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime.
Addressing Community Gang Problems: A Model for Problem Solving
Addressing Community
Gang Problems: A Model
for Problem Solving
January 1997
Reprinted August 1999
Monograph
NCJ 156059
i
Foreword
Urban street-gang involvement in drug trafficking and violent crime is becoming increasingly widespreadnot just in large cities, but in suburban
areas and small towns as well.
The Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) recognizes that programs aimed at
combating gang-related criminal activity must incorporate both crime prevention and crime control initiatives to be effective over long periods of
time. Accordingly, in October 1991, BJA initiated the development of a
prototype model of the Comprehensive Gang Initiative.
BJA is pleased to present this monograph, Addressing Community Gang
Problems: A Model for Problem Solving, as a product of that initiative. The
model can assist local communities in addressing gang problems by focusing on a comprehensive strategy for preventing and controlling streetgang drug trafficking and related violent crime with components ranging
from prevention to suppression. Police, other law enforcement agencies,
and numerous public and private organizations can implement this
prototype.
A companion monograph, Addressing Community Gang Problems: A Practical Guide, provides additional indepth guidance to communities developing their unique responses to local gang problems.
Nancy E. Gist
Director
iii
Acknowledgments
The Bureau of Justice Assistance wishes to thank the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) and, in particular, John Stedman and Deborah Lamm
Weisel, for their help and guidance in compiling this document.
Contents
Executive Summary ..................................................................................... ix
Chapter 1
Introduction ............................................................................. 1
Purpose of the Comprehensive Gang Initiative.................. 1
Comprehensive Gang Initiative Principles
and Key Features ..................................................................... 2
About This Monograph .......................................................... 3
Chapter 2
Gang Problems: What We Know Affects

What We Do ............................................................................. 5
What We Know About Gangs ............................................... 5
What We Know About Gang Problems ............................... 6
Barriers to Addressing Gang Problems................................ 7
Chapter 3
Defining Gang Problems .................................................... 11

Why Is There Concern About Gangs? ................................ 11
Identifying Gang Problems .................................................. 12
Cutting Problems Down to Size .......................................... 12
Labeling Problems ................................................................. 14
Chapter 4
Solving Gang Problems ...................................................... 17

Scanning Stage ....................................................................... 17
Analysis Stage ........................................................................ 18
Chapter 5
Response and Assessment .................................................. 25

Response Stage ....................................................................... 25
Assessment Stage ................................................................... 28
Conclusion ................................................................................................... 31
Appendix A Bibliography .......................................................................... 33
Appendix B Sources for Further Information ....................................... 35
Appendix C Problem-Solving Worksheet ............................................. 37
vii
Executive Summary
In October 1991 the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) entered into a cooperative agreement with the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) to
develop a Comprehensive Gang Initiative prototype model aimed at combating gang-related criminal activity by incorporating both prevention
and crime control initiatives. The purpose of this monograph is to provide
direction in identifying, analyzing, and responding to gang-related problems and in assessing results in an effective way. Any community facing
chronic or emerging gang problems can use this document together with
training and technical assistance to determine how best to implement the
Comprehensive Gang Initiative.
The Comprehensive Gang Initiative model is based on the following
principles:
Adaptability. The model can be applied to a variety of gang-related
problems within a jurisdiction and to those problems faced by a variety
of jurisdictions.
The purpose of
this monograph is
to provide direction
in identifying,
analyzing, and
responding to
gang-related
problems and in
assessing results in
an effective way.
Flexibility. Modifications can be made in response to, or in anticipation

of, changes within gangs, in gang problems as a result of anti-gang
efforts, or in circumstances within communities.
Multifaceted approach. The model involves various government and
private agencies that simultaneously address the many factors that give
rise to and sustain gang problems, and it supports direct community
participation in intervention efforts.
In 1993 BJA introduced the Comprehensive Gang Initiative Demonstration
Program to implement the prototype model at four demonstration sites.
The four sites selected include the Suffolk County, Massachusetts, District
Attorneys Office; the Tri-City Task Force of Seven Hills, Parma, and
Parma Heights, Ohio; the JAY Initiative of Jefferson County and Aurora,
Colorado; and the San Diego, California, Police Department.
What We Know About Gangs and

Gang Problems
Research into gangs and their behaviors reveals several general facts that
can be applied across geographic, demographic, and ethnic settings. There
is a great deal of variability in gangs, gang activity, and gang problems
within and among communities. Gang problems evolve in response to
direct interventions and indirect factors. Reactions to gangs differfrom
denial to sensationalism. Gang problems, like most crime and disorder
ix
conditions, are concentrated geographically. Finally, while responses to

gang problems are diverse, the responses can be grouped into three categoriesprevention, intervention, and enforcement.
Barriers to Addressing Gang Problems

The most effective
approaches to
addressing gangrelated problems
involve several
agencies or groups
handling a number
of facets of local
gang problems . . . .
The most effective approaches to addressing gang-related problems involve several agencies or groups handling a number of facets of local gang
problems and focusing on suppression, intervention, and prevention. Yet,
even with such collaborative approaches, a number of inherent barriers
need to be overcome. They include defining gang problems, forming successful collaborations, discerning the difference between ends and means,
and determining impact.
Because of the diversity of gangs and their activities, many communities
have trouble defining, or even recognizing, their gang problems. The inability to specifically define gang problems results from the absence of a
local or national consensus on the definition of gangs and the harm they
inflict. This model defines a gang-related problem as a group of harmful
incidents that occur in a community, are similar in one or more ways, and
cause concern to the public.
When more than one agency or group works with gang issues, lack of
coordination is common. While agencies or groups working on gang problems carry out their respective roles, it is essential that their actions be
coordinated by a management group made up of representatives of the
participating agencies. The management group must guide the agencies
in their roles and responsibilities in responding to gang issues.
Uncertainty in problem identification and difficulties in collaboration often
contribute to a confusion between ends and means. Under pressure to do
something about gang problems, agencies tend to implement and promote programs and activities that appear to demonstrate they are taking
action against gangs, even though these programs may lack clear goals and
objectives based on careful examination of the communitys problems and
needs.
Also missing in many efforts are analyses of the impact that programs
should have on gang problems and how the programs alleviate harm to
the community. This uncertainty is often due, in part, to the confusion
between ends and means. However, it may also result from an agencys
failure to properly document the impact of its actions. Instead, there is a
tendency to focus on activities and processes (for example, recording attendance at a community meeting or counting the number of gang-related
arrests), rather than on making quantifiable reductions in gang membership, gang activities, or the harm that gangs inflict on the community.
When communities decide to take action to deal with gang problems, it is

common for the individuals involved to feel overwhelmed by the concerns
associated with these problemsboth the broad social problems and the
behaviors causing specific harms. The public, media, and local government agencies can become fixated on an undefined gang problem. A
constructive approach is to take large, undefined problems and break
them into smaller, more manageable ones, such as addressing graffiti at a
specific location rather than citywide. This approach allows for the development of individualized responses that can be assembled into comprehensive solutions.
Solving Gang Problems

Gang problems can be addressed using a comprehensive problem-solving
model that encompasses the four stages of the problem-solving process:
scanning, analysis, response, and assessment (SARA). This process is
designed to solve a problem by clearly identifying it, using numerous
sources of information to investigate the problem with different levels of
detail, developing a variety of solutions, and conducting an evaluation.
Scanning. The initial stage of scanning involves looking for and
identifying problems. A problem exists when the following
parenthetical terms can be replaced with specific examples: (Victims)
are (harmed) by the (behaviors) of (offenders) at or in (places) at
(times). Completing this problem statement is an important first step
in problem solving; it achieves consensus on the kind of problem being
addressed and provides guidance to further understand the problem.
Analysis. The objective of the analysis stage is to develop a thorough
understanding of a problem. Although often overlooked, analysis is
perhaps the most important part of the problem-solving model because
it provides valuable information that can be used to craft appropriate
responses to a problem. Analysis is also useful for assessing the
effectiveness of responses because it often provides a baseline for
simple before-and-after measurements of a responses impact. Analysis
consists of straightforward investigation of concrete problems. The best
analysis involves creative information collection. A Problem-Solving
Worksheet that provides a framework for collecting information from
the analysis is included as part of this monograph. After a problem
has been thoroughly analyzed, goals should be established for the
problem-solving effort. Many problems cannot be solved completely
or eliminated; therefore, responses should be designed based on one of
the following purposes: totally eliminating the problem; substantially
reducing the problem; reducing the harm created by the problem; or
dealing with the problem more effectively.
The SARA model . . .

encompasses the
four stages of the
problem-solving
process: scanning,
analysis, response,
and assessment.
Response. The response stage has three objectivesdeveloping

response options that are consistent with the information analyzed,
xi
selecting responses, and implementing the responses. Responses should

focus on offenders, victims, third parties, places, and/or tools used to
create the harm. The information collected during the analysis stage
facilitates the selection of the most effective responsesthose responses
that take into account community values and often contain input from
individuals directly affected by the problem. When implementing a
response, programs need clear and consistent leadership, even in the
most collaborative efforts.
The assessment
should focus on
the problem statement, rather than
on the response.
Assessment. The assessment stage provides useful feedback on how

well the response is working. This information can be used to change
the response, improve the analysis, or even redefine the nature of the
problem. Information gathered through assessment can also be used
to plan strategies for classes of problems and to revise the problemsolving process. The assessment should focus on the problem statement, rather than on the response. An assessment plan should link the
implemented response with the problem that was identified during
the scanning stage. The true impact of a response is measured by its
effect on the harm suffered. Good assessment plans also include several
measures that might capture unintended consequences. While there
are no definite rules for assessing gang problems, the methods of information collection used in the analysis stage can be replicated during the
assessment. Assessments need not be difficult. Collecting a handful of
measures (perhaps four or five) from different vantage points should
demonstrate a responses effectiveness. It is important to take multiple
measurements during assessment in case some measurements are not
sensitive enough to illustrate impact. Assessing the effectiveness of
the problem-solving effort emphasizes the importance of developing
clearly defined goals, thoroughly documenting the entire process, and
taking baseline measurements.
Conclusion
The Comprehensive Gang Initiative model provides a method for overcoming the barriers faced by agencies and groups attempting to address
gang-related problems. It is a dynamic, ongoing process that provides
guidance in examining a problem and finding out what factors allow the
problem to persist. Answering the questions raised by the model is essential in selecting an appropriate response to gang-related problems in
communities.
xii
Chapter 1
Introduction
This monograph was developed for agencies and groups participating in
the Comprehensive Gang Initiative, a demonstration program of the Bureau of Justice Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice. The purpose of this
monograph is to provide direction in identifying, analyzing, and responding to gang-related problems and in assessing results in an effective way.
Together with training and technical assistance, this document can be used
by any community facing chronic or emerging gang problems to determine how best to implement the Comprehensive Gang Initiative. A companion monograph, Addressing Community Gang Problems: A Practical
Guide, provides additional indepth guidance to communities developing
their unique responses to local gang problems.
Purpose of the Comprehensive

Gang Initiative
. . . this document
can be used by any
community facing
chronic or
emerging gang
problems to
determine how
best to implement
the Comprehensive
Gang Initiative.
The purpose of the Comprehensive Gang Initiative is to demonstrate a

comprehensive program that prevents and controls emerging and chronic
urban street-gang drug trafficking and related violent crime by identifying,
promoting, and implementing promising strategies in selected jurisdictions. The Comprehensive Gang Initiative seeks to accomplish the following objectives:
Assess existing community programs for preventing and controlling
illegal drug trafficking and violence by gangs.
Develop a comprehensive gang prevention and control process model
for cities with chronic or emerging gang problems.
Develop training and technical assistance materials that document how
to replicate the model in selected sites.
Provide training and technical assistance to demonstration sites.
Evaluate the comprehensive gang program demonstrations.
Disseminate the results of the demonstrations.
The Comprehensive Gang Initiative strategy focuses on the analysis of local gang problems and the selection of the most effective intervention components as a systematic process, consisting of a set of analytical steps.
Applying such an approach locally will result in tailormade interventions.
The composition of each local comprehensive strategythe mix of police,
prosecutorial, educational, counseling, and other componentswill differ
from one community to the next according to the types of gangs encountered and their variable harmful behaviors.
1
Because gangs
thrive in
disorganized
communities, any
local intervention
must rally the
community to
organize and work
together.
Because gang problems continually change, partially in response to interventions, any local intervention must have a strong problem-analysis component that not only gathers intelligence, but also includes data analysis
and community input. Gang problems are multifaceted; therefore, local interventions require a collaborative approach. Because gangs thrive in disorganized communities, any local intervention must rally the community
to organize and work together. This approach is based on the premise that,
although the nature of gang problems change, gangs have existed for a
long time and are not likely to disappear.
Comprehensive Gang Initiative Principles

and Key Features
The Comprehensive Gang Initiative model is based on three principles:
Adaptability. The model can be applied to various gang-related
problems within a jurisdiction and to those problems faced by different
jurisdictions.
Flexibility. Modifications can be made in response to, or in anticipation
of, changes within gangsand changes in gang problems resulting
from anti-gang efforts or changing circumstances within communities.
Multifaceted approach. The model involves various government and
private agencies that address the many factors that simultaneously give
rise to and sustain gang problems, and it supports direct community
participation in intervention efforts.
The Comprehensive Gang Initiative model also is based on the following
key features:
Focus on harmful behaviors. Identifying and reducing or eliminating
gang behaviors that cause harm are central elements to solving gang
problems.
Continuous problem diagnosis. Gang-related problems are as diverse
as the communities in which they appear. Each problem must be
understood to be solved; this requires careful examination of the
problems elements and possible causes. Specific responses can then be
developed for the defined problem.
Response coordination. Although local governments still typically
address their communities gang problems primarily through police
efforts, collaboration with other agencies and community groups is
becoming more common. Currently, the best approaches involve
several agencies or groups handling a number of facets of local gang
problems and focusing on suppression, intervention, and prevention
(Spergel, 1991). Such efforts may include community groups working
with schools, prosecutors, police, parks and recreation, and other public
and private organizations.
Performance monitoring. Continuous monitoring is needed to ensure
that responses to gang-related problems are proceeding as planned, to
determine if those responses are providing solutions, and to detect
signs that they may need modification because either the nature of the
problem has changed or the response resulted in unintended negative
effects.
Impact evaluation. Evaluating responses to gang problems will help
authorities in deciding whether a response was successful and should
continue, thus assisting staff in improving responses.
Adaptation to change. As a result of direct interventions and indirect
variables such as demographics and the economy, the nature of gang
problems is likely to change. Those involved in solving problems
related to gangs must adapt their responses to changes and constantly
examine the environment to detect and analyze new or changing
problems.
In summary, the Comprehensive Gang Initiative is a dynamic, ongoing
effort that brings together agencies and individuals to reduce the harm inflicted by gangs on communities.
About This Monograph

The remainder of this monograph presents the SARA model for solving
gang-related problems from the Comprehensive Gang Initiative. Chapter
2, Gang Problems: What We Know Affects What We Do, lays the foundation for the model and discusses what is known about gangs, gang problems, and barriers to dealing with gang problems. Chapter 3, Defining
Gang Problems, provides guidance on defining gang problems in a manageable way by focusing on gang behaviors that cause harm and striving
for small wins. Chapter 4, Solving Gang Problems, and Chapter 5, Response and Assessment, describe the four stages of the problem-solving
model: scanning, analysis, response, and assessment. Relevant examples
illustrate the concepts and instructions presented.
Those involved in
solving problems
related to gangs
must adapt their
responses to
changes and
constantly examine
the environment to
detect and analyze
new or changing
problems.
Appendix A contains a bibliography of readings related to solving gang

problems. Appendix B lists sources for further information. Finally, Appendix C provides a worksheet to guide community leaders through the
stages of the problem-solving process.
Chapter 2
Gang Problems: What We

Know Affects What We Do
The growing complexity of the interrelated problems of gangs, drugs, and
violence calls for an understanding of gangs and the problems they create,
how problems are dealt with, and how problems are concentrated. This
knowledge affects how we respond to gang problems. This chapter discusses what is known about gangs, gang problems, and barriers to dealing
with gang problems. This information is the foundation for the Comprehensive Gang Initiative process model presented in the remaining chapters
of this monograph.
What We Know About Gangs

The phenomena of juvenile and adult gangs, drug trafficking, and urban
violence are far from new. In the past they have been treated as separate
problems, an approach meeting with disappointing results. Experience has
shown that these problems are interconnectedposing an even greater
threat to communities. One result of this total effect is the increase in drugrelated homicides among gang members. Much of this violence appears to
be random, affecting innocent bystanders as well as its intended targets.
The interrelated problems of gangs, drugs, and violence have been addressed in a variety of research studies. Although much recent research
suggests that the relationship of gangs, drugs, and crime may vary by the
type of gang, these findings are inconclusive. One reason is that researchers have not been able to agree on how to define a gang, making an ultimate link among gangs, violence, and drugs difficult to establish. Another
reason for the uncertainty is that researchers have not made appropriate
distinctions among different types of gangs. Some gangs are clearly involved in drug trafficking, drug dealing, and violence; some are not. Klein
and Maxson are quite clear in their assessment of gang problems: The assumption of dealing with common phenomena from city to city is not only
inappropriate, it is grossly inaccurate, (Klein and Maxson, 1989).
Some gangs are

clearly involved in
drug trafficking,
drug dealing, and
violence; some are
not.
A few general but important facts about gangs can be applied across assorted geographic, demographic, and ethnic settings:
Gangs are diverse. There is a great deal of variability in gangs, gang
activity, and gang problems. Gangs vary by ethnic makeup, involvement
in predatory crime, drug-related activities, age of members, propensity
toward violence, and organizational stability and unity. Even for a

single factor such as drug trafficking, there is variation among gangs in
the types of drugs sold, the aggressiveness used in expanding drug
markets, and the willingness to use violence. These variations exist
within and among different communities.
Gangs change. Gangs evolve, partially in response to direct factors
(prevention, intervention, and suppression efforts) and partially in
response to indirect factors (demographic shifts, economic conditions,
and influence of media).
Reactions to gangs vary. Some communities choose to deny that a gang
exists; others experience sensationalism if one is identified. Some
communities develop task forces and networks to address gang issues;
others conduct assessments to determine the nature and scope of gang
problems.
Effective responses are diverse. Communities have developed various
responses to gangs; these responses can generally be grouped into three
categoriesprevention, intervention, and enforcement (often known as
suppression).
What We Know About Gang Problems

Crime and
disorder are
concentrated in
all neighborhoods:
10 percent of
criminals commit
approximately 55
percent of all
crimes.
When confronting gang problems, it is important to recognize one recurring feature of crime and disorder in all neighborhoods: it is concentrated.
This characteristic has important implications for dealing with gang problems. Analysis of arrest records and offender interviews shows that offenders differ substantially and the worst 10 percent of criminals commit
approximately 55 percent of all crimes (Blumstein et al., 1986). A similar
concentration phenomenon exists with gang members.
Concentration of gang members. Most gang members are only
peripherally involved in drug dealing, violence, and crime; a small
percentage of gang members account for most of the harm done by
their gang.
Concentration among victims. A few particularly vulnerable people
run a higher risk of victimization than most individuals: the most
vulnerable 10 percent of victims are involved in about 40 percent of all
crimes (Nelson, 1980).
Concentration of place. More than 60 percent of crimes are committed
at a few particularly dangerous locations (Pierce, Spaar, and Briggs,
1986; Sherman, 1987; Spelman and Eck, 1989) and crime rates are much
higher in neighborhoods in which more potential offenders live or visit.
For example, poor, urban adolescent males join gangs and commit property crimes at higher rates than other youths. Because poor youth have few
sources of transportation, it is not surprising that they commit crimes near
their homes. Neighborhoods with open-air drug markets or bars that cater
to a rowdy or criminal element also attract potential offenders located

nearby. Because more offenders willing to commit crimes live in these
neighborhoods, more crimes are committed there.
A high-rise retirement complex probably houses few gang members but
may attract gang members from the surrounding area who are would-be
robbers, if they think the resident retirees carry cash and would not resist
an attack. Property crime rates are often high in college communities because students are more likely to leave cars and bicycles unlocked and often leave wallets and purses where they can easily be taken.
However, a neighborhood with many potential offenders or victims can
have a low crime rate if the victims and offenders do not come into contact
with each other. For example, apartment complexes for the elderly separate this group of potential victims from people who might prey upon
them.
Thus, neighborhood gang problems differ in predictable ways for comprehensible reasons. The implications for gang problem prevention are obvious: to reduce the rate of gang problems in an area, it is important to
determine the problems in the neighborhood and the actions needed to reduce the number of available offenders or victims or to separate potential
offenders and victims. Addressing the entire social problem of gangs is not
necessary to realize a substantial impact; selecting a smaller gang problem
can yield disproportionately large benefits. Because neighborhoods differ,
the best prevention strategies will vary from one neighborhood to the next.
Community problem solvers must study an areas social and physical conditions before developing and implementing strategies.
Addressing the
entire social
problem of gangs
is not necessary
to realize a
substantial
impact . . . .
Barriers to Addressing Gang Problems

The more effective collaborative approach to gang prevention and controlversus the single-agency responseacknowledges that related drug,
violence, and other problems require a variety of skills, resources, and information to solve them. Although the dedication and hard work of people
responding to gangs has resulted in the development of many innovative
and effective tactics, a number of inherent complexities remain and must
be addressed in a cooperative approach. Such issues include defining gang
problems, forming a successful collaboration, discerning the difference between ends and means, and determining the impact of actions taken to address defined problems. Each of these issues is discussed in more detail in
the remainder of this chapter.
Defining Gang Problems

Because of the diversity of gangs and their activities, many communities
have trouble defining, or even recognizing, their gang problems. Some
communities deny having a problem. Many communities address their
7
gang problems under the direction of an individual with a personal mission (for example, to save children, make a better world, or decrease
crime). There is seldom an officially organized or sanctioned response. Often attention focuses on the gang problem only as a result of a deplorable
gang-related incident, such as the murder of a police officer. After such an
incident, the response may be an overreaction such as a heavy suppressionoriented effort rather than a plan to address the causes of gang activity.
The public, media, and local government agencies may become fixated on
an ill-defined gang problem rather than on the specific harm caused by
gangs. This type of reaction is not surprising, however, considering that
communities and government agencies tend to lack experience in identifying and developing responses to specific gang problems.
The inability to specifically define gang problems results from the absence
of a local or national consensus on the definition of gangs and the harm
they inflict. People often turn first to the police for information concerning
gangs. But police departments usually have only one objective with respect to gangsto control harmful behaviors via suppression. This perspective, while important, does not allow those concerned to assess all the
factors that contribute to gang problems. Information should be gathered
from all resources available to the community (for example, police, schools,
courts, and community groups) to develop a clear picture of gangs and the
problems they cause.
Forming a Successful Collaboration

. . . a management
group made up of
representatives of
the participating
agencies . . .
should guide the
agencies in
their roles and
responsibilities in
responding to
gang issues.
When more than one agency or group works with gang issues, lack of coordination of efforts is common. A lack of collaboration can also occur
when different units of the same agency address gang problems; this fragmentation is often the result of turf divisions or the bureaucratic division
of labor or services. One of the most important components of a successful
approach to gangs is multiagency cooperation (Spergel, 1991). While the
agencies or groups carry out their respective roles in the effort, it is essential that their actions be coordinated by a management group made up of
representatives of the participating agencies. The management group
should guide the agencies in their roles and responsibilities in responding
to gang issues. The management group must have the political authority to
coordinate the effort, but it should not dominate the process.
Discerning the Difference Between Ends and Means

Uncertainty in problem identification and difficulties in collaboration often
contribute to a third problem: confusion between ends and means. Under
pressure to do something about gang problems, agencies tend to implement and promote programs and activities that demonstrate they are taking action against gangs, even though these programs may lack clear goals
and objectives based on careful examination of the communitys problems
and needs. Also missing in many efforts are analyses of the impact that
programs should have on gang problems and how the programs would
alleviate harm to the community. Specific gang problems, resulting harms,
and desired impacts need to be precisely defined before programs are
implemented.
Determining Impact
Although reports of the efforts of practitioners who regularly deal with
gang problemspolice officers, prosecutors, social workers, community
organizers, educators, and otherscan provide detailed policy guidance,
the credibility of such reports may be questionable without systematic
evaluations documenting the effectiveness of their practices. This uncertainty is often due, in part, to the confusion between ends and means.
However, it may also result from the failure of agencies to properly document the impact of their actions.
Research shows that most programs lack impact measures relating to the
alleviation or elimination of the specific harm caused by gangs. Instead,
there is a tendency to focus on activities and processes (for example, recording how many people attended a community meeting or how many
gang arrests were made), rather than on quantifiable reductions in gang
membership, gang activities, or harm caused by gangs.
In the past, gang prevention and control programs were designed for individual locales and situations; they are not adaptable to todays diverse
gang problems. A strategy must be developed that can be applied to the
continually changing nature and behaviors of gangs.
. . . there is a
tendency to focus
on . . . how many
people attended a
community
meeting or how
many gang arrests
were made, rather
than on
quantifiable
reductions in . . .
harm caused by
gangs.
Chapter 3
Defining Gang Problems

Before it is possible to solve gang problems, it is necessary to define them.
This chapter provides guidance on defining gang problems in a manageable way by focusing on gang behaviors that cause harm and striving for
small wins.
Why Is There Concern About Gangs?

Gangs cause concern because of their harmful behaviors, such as the following:
Wearing clothing that displays gang colors.
Hanging out in public areas and creating a menacing presence.
Defacing property with graffiti.
Selling drugs.
Wearing gang colors to school can lead to confrontations and fights among
members of rival gangs. People are not concerned about Boy Scout or
school athletic team uniforms because they are not linked to harmful behaviors. However, the harm associated with the wearing of gang colors
makes this behavior undesirable.
Hanging out in certain public locations may cause concern if the gang
members make rude and intimidating comments to passersby. People may
be concerned that the members of the gang will assault them. Community
residents are often leery of venturing out into their own neighborhoods for
fear of being caught in the crossfire of gang warfare. Here a distinction
must be drawn between perception (residents fears of confrontation) and
actual behavior (gang members threatening and assaultive actions).
Though harm is created by both, responses to these two problems may be
quite different.
Graffiti scrawled on private or public property are unsightly and reduce
property values. In addition, rival gangs crossing out graffiti can often lead
to violent clashes between gangs. Such a direct link between an action and
resulting harm easily identifies harmful behavior.
In some communities, gang members are involved in illegal drug trafficking. Residents are concerned about exposure to such activity, especially
when it causes violence among rival drug gangs that may affect residents,
their families, and friends. Many other individuals and groups with no
gang affiliation are involved in drug trafficking. Even many gang members
who traffic in drugs do so on their own and not as a gang activity. Thus,
. . . a distinction
must be drawn
between
perception
(residents fears of
confrontation) and
actual behavior
(gang members
threatening and
assaultive actions).
11
solutions to drug-trafficking problems may need to focus on specific individuals or locations, regardless of any gang affiliation.
If gang members
merely loitered on
street corners
wearing distinctive
clothing and did
not threaten or
assault people,
deal in drugs, or
deface property,
they would be just
another colorful
part of city life.
If gang members merely loitered on street corners wearing distinctive

clothing and did not threaten or assault people, deal in drugs, or deface
property, they would be just another colorful part of city life. Establishing
a factual link between a behavior and the harm it causes is critical to identifying and solving problems.
Identifying Gang Problems

When do these gang behaviors become a problem? The following elements
constitute a problem (Spelman and Eck, 1989):
A problem involves a group of harmful incidents. Although an
isolated harmful incident should be dealt with, it is difficult to analyze
and does not require a long-term solution because it will not reoccur.
More than one or two incidents constitute a true problem for which a
solution can be devised.
The incidents that make up the problem must be similar in some way.
A number of similarities may exist within a problem: the incidents may
have occurred at the same place or time; the people involved may have
similar characteristics or engage in the same type of behavior; or the
social or physical environment may provide a similar context for each
event. If incidents cannot be grouped, there can be no common solution
to prevent future occurrences.
A problem must be of direct concern to the public. Generally, a
problem causes concern within a community if someone is injured,
property is stolen or damaged, or serious social or economic costs
result.
A problem, then, involves a group of harmful incidents that occur in a
community, are similar in one or more ways, and cause concern to the
public.
The harmful behaviors associated with gang problems vary from community to community and gang to gang. Furthermore, some gang members
engage in more harmful behaviors than others. For these reasons, each
community should examine the behaviors of its gangs, determine which
behaviors are harmful and cause problems, and select responses appropriate to those behaviors.
Cutting Problems Down to Size

When communities decide to take action to deal with gang problems, it is
common for the individuals involved to feel overwhelmed by the concerns
associated with these problemsboth the broad social problems and the
behaviors causing specific harm. The public, media, and local government
12
agencies can become fixated on an undefined gang problem. A common

question is: How does a community or group approach gang problems?
Psychologist Karl Weick (1984) has devised a way of approaching problems that makes them more manageable and thus makes responses to the
problems more successful: focusing on small wins. Weick points out that
as people begin examining social problems, they tend to do so on a massive scale. For example, they may look at eliminating unemployment, mental illness, homelessness, or crime. Social problems are often presented in
this way in an effort to mobilize greater action. Such a broad consideration
of social ills tends to overpower a communitys ability to conceive innovative ways to address them. When faced with problems of this magnitude,
people experience frustration, anxiety, and helplessness, which limit the
quality of their responses.
A more constructive approach is to take large problems and break them
into smaller, more manageable ones, such as addressing graffiti at a specific location rather than citywide. This approach allows for the development of individualized responses that can be assembled into comprehensive
solutions. According to Weick (1984), A small win is a concrete, complete,
implemented outcome of moderate importance. Individual small wins
may not seem important, but a succession of meaningful wins sets a positive precedent that may attract support and, at the same time, reduce resistance to future efforts:
Small wins help people learn about a specific problem, their ability and
resources to deal with it, and problem solving in general. Small wins
are easily understood and rewarding.
One small win often leads to additional small wins by bringing in new
partners with new information and innovative ways of approaching
and solving problems. Thus, the possibility of solving more than just
the problems at hand increases. Small wins, particularly a series of
them, can attract the attention of policymakers and elected officials.
A constructive
approach is to take
large problems and
break them into
smaller, more
manageable ones,
such as addressing
graffiti at a specific
location rather
than citywide.
A series of small wins can provide the foundation for a larger win.
Small wins bring order into confusing surroundings because they are
achievable and provide immediate attainment of precise goals. An
accumulation of wins over smaller problems may have an impact on a
larger problem.
A small win can reflect a major change in a relatively insignificant
problem or a meager change in a significant problem. A small win
sometimes completely solves the problem at hand.
Problems are dynamic; they change in response to an ever-changing
environment. Simply addressing a problem causes the surrounding
conditions to change. Because of these fluctuating conditions, it is
difficult to map out a long-range strategy. Planning for small wins
allows flexibility in the response to a problem.
13
What does the strategy of small wins mean for groups addressing gang
problems? Community groups can develop problem statements related to
specific harm to be addressed separately instead of a program to wholly
eliminate gangs. Examples of such individual problems are driveby
shootings at the corner of 8th and Main, a high truancy rate of ganginvolved youths at Garfield High School, graffiti on the walls surrounding
the Mystic public housing complex, and fights breaking out in the Neely
Junior High School due to intergang conflict. Dividing the larger gang
problem into discrete problems and focusing responses on reducing or
eliminating the harms they create increases the possibility of successfully
dealing with gangs.
The strategy of small wins also facilitates the decision of which problems
to attack first. For example, a new coalition with little experience working
together should select what appear to be relatively easy problems to attack
first. Small wins can build the confidence of group members, provide valuable insight into the strengths and weaknesses of the groups operation,
and show others that the coalitions efforts are worthwhile.
Labeling Problems
It is tempting to
resort to the
criminal law code
when trying to
identify gang
problems . . . ,
but there are
weaknesses to
defining problems
solely in terms of
criminal law.
It is tempting to resort to the criminal law code when trying to identify

gang problems and their resulting harm. This approach is attractive to police and prosecutors because the law is a familiar frame of reference for
them. However, there are several weaknesses to defining problems solely
in terms of criminal law (Goldstein, 1990):
Trying to deal with a distinctive behavior by grouping behaviors under
a single statutory term may blur valuable distinctions that would be
helpful in developing effective responses. For example, the term
vandalism can cover several harmful activities committed by gang
members, such as spray-painting or etching graffiti, breaking windows,
or slicing automobile tires. Each of these problems should be addressed
separately. Such an approach is more useful than applying broad
categories to define specific gang problems.
Using criminal statute terms also tends to make people think about
responses to problems primarily from the perspective of arrest and
prosecution. Arrest and prosecution for harmful behaviors are often
appropriate; however, punishment occurs after the harm has been
committed and has only a small impact on preventing the harmful
behaviors from recurring.
Finally, some harmful behaviors may not violate the law. For example,
a group of gang members hanging out in a public park in the daylight
is probably legal. However, because of their presence, others may be
reluctant to use the park for fear of intimidation or assault. The behavior
causing fear is not illegal, but it is harmful.
14
Even if the law does not define a problem, it can help define possible responses to it. Thus it is critical to consider legal authority only after a problem has been defined according to harmful, not just illegal, behaviors.
It is important to be careful about the initial labeling of a problem. Sometimes, after it has been carefully examined, the problem appears to be different from the one first identified. Harmful gang behaviors can be
identified and labeled by answering the following questions:
In what types of behaviors do local gangs engage?
Which of these gang behaviors cause harm?
What specific harm do these behaviors cause?
Is someone injured?
Is something taken?
Is property damaged?
Are there serious social or economic repercussions?
Sometimes, after
the problem has
been carefully
examined, it
appears to be
different from
the one first
identified.
Who carries out these harmful behaviors?

In seeking answers to these questions, it is important to focus on specific
activities identified through local experience or awareness.
15
Chapter 4
Solving Gang Problems

Gang problems can be addressed using a Figure 1. SARA Model
comprehensive problem-solving model
that encompasses the four stages of the
problem-solving process: scanning,
Scanning
analysis, response, and assessment (Eck
and Spelman, 1987). This process is
called the SARA model (see Figure 1). It
is designed to solve a problem by clearly
identifying it, using various sources of
Analysis
information to investigate the problem
with varying levels of detail, developing
a variety of solutions, and finally conducting an evaluation. In addressing
gang problems, communities should
remember that models are useful tools,
Response
but they are not solutions. Herman
Goldstein points out that there is a danger in providing models with detailed
steps that may oversimplify the process.
The fear is that more effort will be inAssessment
vested in moving mechanically through
the recommended steps than in the explorations and thinking that the steps are
encouraged to stimulate, (Goldstein, 1990). Nevertheless, models can
guide the problem-solving process. This chapter presents the first two
stages of the SARA model: scanning and analysis. Chapter 5 discusses the
response and assessment stages.
Scanning Stage
The initial stage of scanning involves identifying problems and bringing
them to the attention of the group, thereby initiating the problem-solving
cycle. Scanning is the responsibility of everyone involved in this comprehensive approach. Potential sources for identifying problems include
citizen complaints; census data; police reports, calls for service, and intelligence information; data from other government agencies such as schools,
public health, social services, and parks and recreation; media coverage of
the community; and community surveys.
17
In identifying problems, one must remember that a problem consists of a

group of harmful incidents occurring in a community that are similar in
one or more ways and of concern to the public. Four additional elements
are needed to make up a probleman offender, a victim, and a place and
time where they come together.
To identify the problem, a problem statement can be developed by substituting specific examples for the parenthetical terms in the following sentence:
(Victims) are (harmed) by the (behaviors) of (offenders) at or in (places)
at (times).
The following are examples of completed problem statements:
(Bellwood Elementary students) are (frightened) by the (spray-painted graffiti)
of (taggers) in (school bathrooms) during (breaks between classes).
(Store patrons) are (robbed) by (youths) at (convenience stores on Greenwood
Avenue) (after dark).
Completing this statement is a simple but important first step in problem
solving; it achieves consensus on the kind of problem being addressed and
provides guidance to further understand the problem.
Analysis Stage
The objective of the analysis stage is to develop a thorough understanding
of a problem. Analysis is perhaps the most important part of the problemsolving model because it provides valuable information that can be used
to craft appropriate responses to the problem. Analysis is also extremely
useful for assessing the effectiveness of responses because it can provide a
baseline for simple before-and-after measurements of a responses impact.
However, analysis is often the most overlooked part of problem solving.
Failure to analyze the problem completely may occur because problem
solvers have already settled on a favored response and wish to avoid
additional investigation that might lead to more responses from which to
choose. Failure to analyze also occurs because participants in the problemsolving process believe analysis is difficult, although it need not be.
The best analysis

involves creativity
in collecting
information.
Analysis consists of a straightforward investigation of concrete problems.

The best analysis involves creativity in collecting information. The ProblemSolving Worksheet (see Appendix C) provides a framework for collecting
analysis information. Information about a problem is collected using the
following methods:
Surveys or interviews of residents, victims, store clerks or managers,
passersby, neighbors, offenders, police officers and detectives, security
personnel, parks and recreation employees, and teachers.
18
Documented observations of problem locations, including recording

pedestrian and vehicular traffic counts, demographic characteristics,
and activities of persons in the area; measuring lighting and ambient
noise; counting the incidence of litter, vandalism, graffiti, abandoned
cars, or other environmental features; and taking photographs or
videos, or making sketches, maps, or charts with space for recording
information.
Statistics including police records, incident reports, and calls for service;
court records; school attendance files including truancy and suspension
records; sales receipts of local businesses; and sales records of specific
tools (such as spray paint).
Understanding the Problem

To learn as much as possible about a problem, it is important to find and
examine information that describes an array of problem characteristics
(Eck and Spelman, 1987). Data must be gathered on the basic elements
involved in every problemactors, incidents, and reactions. Actors may
include victims, offenders, and third parties. A problem is a group of incidents created by the interaction of the actors. Understanding the incidents
that make up a problem requires knowledge of the actors behaviors (sequence of events) and the social context and physical setting within which
the sequence of events takes place. Understanding the problem also requires knowledge of the immediate results of the events. Finally, reactions
to the incidents by the community (individuals and groups, inside and
outside the jurisdiction) and its institutions (private and public) affect
the actors and how they interact. The information provided here is an
abridged version of the Problem-Solving Worksheet found in Appendix C.
Actors. Actors are the offenders, victims, and third parties involved in the
incidents.
Offenders. Offenders are persons who commit crimes or engage in other
harmful behaviors. For some problems the offender may be obviousthe
students wearing gang colors to school or gang members hanging out on a
corner intimidating people. For other problems the offenders may be less
obviouspeople recruiting new gang members or the group involved in
a driveby shooting. The following information on offenders should be
gathered:
What are the names, age, sex, race, appearance, size, dress, and other
shared features?
What behaviors of offenders are causing the harm?
What benefits do offenders gain from their harmful behaviors?
What tools do they use to carry out their actions?
What are the sources of these tools? How are they obtained?
19
How do the offenders travel to and from the location of the problem?
What activities are the offenders involved in just prior to and during
the harmful behavior?
Do the offenders act alone or with others?
Victims. Victims are persons who are directly harmed as a result of an
offenders actions. As with offenders, it may not always be clear who is a
victim. Questions that can help identify victims include:
What are the age, sex, race, appearance, size, dress, and other shared
features?
What tools could prevent victims from being harmed?
What activities are victims involved in just prior to and during the
harmful behavior?
How do the victims travel to and from the location of the problem?
Are victims alone or with others?
Are people harmed indirectly by the problem? If so, who are they and
how are they harmed?
Third parties. Why do some offenders, victims, and places pose more problems than others? One reason is that people do not act in a vacuum. Often
third parties act (or fail to act) in ways that increase the vulnerability of atrisk people and places. These often-overlooked actors contribute in the following ways:
Controllers, acting in the best interests of the potential offenders, try to
prevent them from committing crimes (Hirschi, 1969; Felson, 1986).
Guardians try to prevent harm to potential victims (Cohen and Felson,
1979).
Managers oversee or control places where problems occur (Eck, 1994).
When controllers, guardians, and managers are present and effective, they
can reduce or even eliminate a recurring problem. When they are absent or
ineffective, they may even make the problem worse.
Important questions to ask regarding third parties include the following:
Who could prevent the offenders from acting in a harmful manner
(controllers)?
Who could prevent the victims from being harmed (guardians)?
Who is responsible for overseeing the place where the problem occurs
(managers)?
Are there others who use the location and may observe the harmful
behavior?
20
Incidents. When examining the incidents that make up a problem, problem solvers should consider the social context and physical setting for the
events, the sequence of actions leading up to and including the incidents,
and the results of the actions taken by the offenders and victims. Questions
to ask regarding incidents are as follows:
What harms are occurring?
How is the harmful behavior carried out?
How long does it take to occur?
At what times of day does the problem occur?
On what days of the week does it occur?
During what months does it occur?
What is the specific location of the problem?
What tools (or lack of tools) at the location enable the harmful
behavior?
What policies or practices enable or encourage the problem to occur
(for example, bus schedules, opening and closing hours)?
What physical barriers are present or absent at the location (for
example, barriers to visual observation such as high shrubbery, store
counters, walls, roadways)?
What are the environmental conditions at the location (for example,
well-lit or dark, outdoors or indoors, heated or cooled, music or
entertainment, benches that encourage loitering)?
What environmental conditions exist when the problem occurs (for
example, at night or during the day, or raining or clear)?
What social conditions exist when the problem occurs (for example,
rush hour, school dismissal, or lunch times)?
Are there secondary, or downstream, harms (for example, a decline
in business on a certain block because of street robberies)?
Reactions. Most incidents produce some type of reaction from the community, government agencies, and the media. These reactions are important
in understanding the problem because they help define the problems seriousness and may directly affect the problem itself. Sometimes the absence
of a reaction, or a general feeling that the incidents were of little consequence, contributes to the problem. Public perception of a problems seriousness often affects the responses. A problem perceived to be very
serious is more likely to receive greater attention and resources than a
problem perceived to be minor. However, a problem that has received
widespread attention and is generally perceived to be serious may be more
difficult to solve because of misinformation and the actions of powerful
interest groups. Questions to ask regarding reactions include the following:
A problem that
has received
widespread
attention and is
generally perceived
to be serious may
be more difficult to
solve because of
misinformation and
the actions of
powerful
interest groups.
21
What are the reactions and attitudes of people in the neighborhood in

which the incidents occur?
What are the reactions and attitudes citywide?
What are the opinions of people outside the city (for example, investors,
job seekers, commuters, tourists, and shoppers)?
What are the reactions and responses of public and private agencies
and organizations as a result of the incidents (for example, police,
prosecutors, courts, corrections, sheriff, legislature, media, businesses,
schools, and social services)?
How seriously is the problem regarded by the public? Why?
What publicity occurred regarding the problem?
Learning more about the actors, incidents, and reactions that make up a
problem should aid in more careful specification of the problem statement
discussed earlier. For example, reconsider the following:
(Bellwood Elementary students) are (frightened) by the (graffiti) in (school bathrooms) during (breaks between classes).
Who are the actors in this incident?
Who specifically is harmed? Perhaps the graffiti are in only one

bathroom, the girls room on the second floor, and only second
graders use the facility. Monitoring bathrooms and interpreting
graffiti may aid in understanding who is being harmed. Perhaps
the graffiti warn that someones money will be taken.
Who is committing the harm? Perhaps the offenders cannot be

readily identified. The absence of answers points to the need for
further analysis. If a specific question cannot be answered, at least
in a general way, it will be difficult to develop an appropriate
response. For example, if the graffiti are painted by boys from the
adjacent Roberts Middle School, then responses to limit restroom
passes, place monitors outside the bathroom, or otherwise guard
against students spray painting graffiti would likely prove useless.
What tools are being used to create the harm? Perhaps broadtipped markers, as opposed to spray paint or etching tools, are
being used to make the graffiti.
What do we know about the incidents?
22
What is the physical setting? Perhaps there is a bathroom window

that is easily reached from a trash dumpster, allowing the boys
access.
What is the sequence of events? Perhaps the graffiti are being

painted during breaks between morning classes or during the lunch
period. Periodic checking of the bathrooms would be useful in
pinpointing the exact time of occurrence.
What are the immediate results? Perhaps the girls are afraid to use
the bathroom and are using one on a different floor, making them
late for classes.
After collecting the additional information, a revised problem sentence

may now read:
(Second grade girls at Bellwood Elementary) are (frightened of being robbed) by
the (spray-painted graffiti) of (boys from Roberts Middle School) in (the second
floor girls bathroom) during (lunch period).
The more specific problem statement provides clear information about appropriate and inappropriate interventions. The worksheet in Appendix C
helps problem solvers focus on the many types of information they should
consider and attempt to collect.
Problem solving requires a balanced approach. It is a mistake to gather
and analyze so much information that paralysis of analysis occurs and
no responses are developed. The analysis should be as practical and action
oriented as possible.
Goals and Objectives

After a problem has been thoroughly analyzed, goals should be established for the problem-solving effort. Since many problems cannot be
solved completely, responses should be based on one of the following
objectives:
It is a mistake to
gather and analyze
so much
information that
paralysis of
analysis occurs
and no responses
are developed.
Totally eliminating the problem.

Substantially reducing the problem.
Reducing the harm created by the problem.
More effectively dealing with the problem.
The information gathered during the analysis stage of the problem-solving
process can be used to make decisions about which problems need to be
addressed first.
23
Chapter 5
Response and Assessment

Detecting and analyzing a problem are only the first steps in problem solving. This chapter describes the last two stages of the SARA model, the response and assessment stages.
Response Stage
The response stage has three objectives: developing options based on information gathered during the analysis, selecting a response, and implementing the response.
Developing Response Options

After a problem has been identified and analyzed, possible responses need
to be developed and listed. These response options should be wide ranging, and no option should be ruled out at this point in the process. The
range of possible responses includes the following strategies (Goldstein,
1990):
Focus in. Concentrate attention on the relatively small number of
individuals who usually account for a disproportionate share of any
problemthose who cause it (offenders), facilitate it (controllers,
managers, and guardians), or suffer from it (victims).
Connect with other governmental and private services. A thorough
analysis of a problem often leads to an appreciation of the need for (1)
more effective referrals of victims and/or offenders to existing
governmental and private services; (2) improved coordination among
agencies that exert control over the problems or individuals involved in
the incidents; and (3) correction of inadequacies in municipal services
and development of new services.
Use mediation and negotiation skills. Often the use of mediation and
negotiation teams can be an effective response to conflicts.
Concentrate
attention on the
relatively small
number of
individuals who
usually account for
a disproportionate
share of any
problem . . . .
Convey information. Relaying sound and accurate information is one

of the least used responses. However, it is potentially the most effective
response to a wide range of problems. Conveying information can (1)
reduce anxiety and fear, (2) enable citizens to solve their own problems,
(3) help people conform to laws and regulations that are not known or
understood, (4) warn potential victims about their vulnerability and
advise them of ways to protect themselves, (5) demonstrate to people
how they unwittingly contribute to problems, (6) develop support for
addressing a problem, and (7) acquaint the community with the
25
limitations of government agencies and define what can be realistically

expected of those agencies.
Mobilize the community. Mobilizing a specific segment of the
community helps to implement a specific response for as long as it
takes to reduce or eliminate problems.
Use existing forms of social control. Use the social control inherent in
existing relationships, such as the influence of a parent, teacher,
employer, or church.
Alter the physical environment to reduce opportunities for problems
to recur. Adapt the principles of crime prevention through
environmental design.
Regulate, through statutes or ordinances, conditions that contribute to
problems. Analysis may draw attention to those factors contributing to
problems that can be controlled by regulation through statutes or
ordinances.
Develop new forms of limited authority to intervene and detain.
Expand problem solvers authority so they can intervene with or detain
persons involved in an incident to prevent it from escalating into
criminal behavior.
Use the criminal justice system only when appropriate, including (1)
straightforward investigation, arrest, and prosecution; (2) selective
enforcement with clear guidelines; (3) enforcement of criminal laws
that, by tradition, are enforced by another agency; (4) greater clarity in
defining behavior subject to criminal justice prosecution or control
through local ordinances; (5) intervention without arrest; (6) arrest
without the intention to prosecute; and (7) attachment of new
conditions to probation or parole.
Use civil laws . . .

including those
related to
licensing, zoning,
property
confiscation,
nuisance
abatement, and
the use of
injunctions . . .
to fight gang
problems.
26
Use civil law to control public nuisances, offensive behavior, and

conditions contributing to crime. Because most police activity involves
arrest and prosecution, people tend to forget that police and local
government can initiate other legal proceedings, including those related
to licensing, zoning, property confiscation, nuisance abatement, and the
use of injunctions.
Responses should focus on offenders, victims, third parties, places, and/or
tools. After all possible responses are listed, information about their legality, cost, effectiveness, and value to the community should be collected
(Goldstein, 1990).
Selecting a Response
The information collected during the analysis stage of the SARA problemsolving model facilitates the selection of the most appropriate responses
from the alternatives listed. The most effective responses take into account
community values and often contain input from individuals directly affected
by the problem. In addition, it is common to use several of the alternatives

to respond to one problem. Some of these responses may be more important than others; some may need to be implemented before others. In deciding which response, or group of responses, to implement, consider the
following factors (Goldstein, 1990):
The likelihood that the response will reduce or otherwise affect the
problem positively.
The effect on the problems most serious features or most important
social concerns.
The preventive character of the response (its ability to reduce repetition
of the problem or the problems serious outcomes).
The extent to which the response invades the lives of people and relies
on legal authority and the possible use of force.
The viewpoints of the various people and organizations (stakeholders)
likely to be affected by the response.
The cost of the response (budget detail).
The availability of legal authority and resources.
The lawfulness and civility of the response and how it will influence
relationships.
In deciding which
response to
implement,
consider . . . its
ability to reduce
repetition of the
problem or the
problems serious
outcomes.
The ease of implementing the response.
Implementing a Response
The following activities take place during implementation of the response:
Listing the tasks required to carry out the response.
Selecting a manager or coordinator for the response.
Setting timelines for accomplishing tasks.
Designing an assessment of the response (discussed later in this chapter).
Coordinating tasks carried out by separate groups.
Developing a written action plan.
Even in the most collaborative efforts, programs need clear and consistent
leadership. Someone needs to assume responsibility for overseeing the response and ensuring that goals and objectives are met. A program coordinator can manage the program on a daily basis to make sure there is timely
implementation, problem solving, and staff direction. Several factors support effective implementation of a response (U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services, 1991):
Leadership. Response managers are responsible for communicating
information, coordinating tasks, and creating a spirit of trust among
27
those carrying out the response. Managers should articulate the goals
and objectives of the response effort.
Teamwork. The role of each person or group involved in the response
effort should be clearly defined. Efforts should be made to facilitate the
exchange of information among those involved.
Communication. Response managers need to stay in touch with others
involved in the response effort so that they are aware of implementation
problems and accomplishments and can obtain problem-solving
information.
Administration. An effective, easy-to-use recordkeeping system and a
method for obtaining information about the response activities should
be developed so that the effort can be monitored continuously.
Assessment Stage
The assessment stage is the final stage of the problem-solving model. Assessment, also referred to as evaluation, provides useful feedback on how
well the response is working. This information can be used to change the
response, improve the analysis, or even redefine the nature of the problem.
Information gathered through assessment can also be used to plan strategies for types of problems and to revise the problem-solving process.
An assessment or
evaluation plan
should link the
implemented
response with the
problem that was
identified during
the scanning
stage.
Linking Implemented Response With Targeted Problem

The assessment should focus on the problem statement, rather than on the
response. An assessment or evaluation plan should link the implemented
response with the problem that was identified during the scanning stage.
Information collected during analysis is useful for the evaluation. For
example, information about the number, size, and frequency of graffiti
markings on a specific wall in a given location can provide a baseline (information to compare against) for an assessment of the response. Perhaps
four graffiti markings occurred each evening, averaging 5 by 2 feet, and
recurring within 24 hours of paint-out efforts. After a response is implemented, the response team should determine whether the response had
any effect on the problemfor example, fewer or smaller graffiti markings.
Determining How the Problem Was Affected

An effective response results in (1) better management of the problem, (2)
reduction of the problem, (3) reduction of the harm caused by the problem,
or (4) elimination of the problem. Therefore, the assessment should indicate in what manner the problem or harm was affected. For example, one
could claim success in the previous graffiti example if fewer incidents of
graffiti occurred each evening, if the average size of graffiti diminished, or
if the time period following paint-outs increased before graffiti reclaimed
the wall.
28
The true impact of a response is measured by its effect on the harm suffered. The graffiti are a means to the harm; the actual harm is the creation
of fear among residents. In this case, both the changes in the frequency and
incidence of graffiti as well as reduced fear in the community should be
documented. A variety of methods can be used to gather this information.
For example, fear can be assessed by observing resident behavior (or the
absence of behavior) or surveying affected individuals.
The assessment should measure the impact the response has on the problem and not rely on activity or process measurements. In the graffiti example, recording the numbers of arrests or citations for graffiti painting,
the number of recreational program attendees, or the number of light fixtures erected in the neighborhood is useful only in describing responses.
These measurements reveal nothing about the impact of the response on
the problem. Useful assessment measures could include reduced fear,
fewer street robberies, or elimination of graffiti in a specific location. Good
assessment or evaluation plans also typically include several measures that
might capture unintended consequences. For example, a successful response to a graffiti problem on a public wall might result in more elderly
persons or families using the area, indicating their reduced fear. In addition, new stores may move into the neighborhood as a welcome but unanticipated consequence.
Good assessment
or evaluation plans
also typically
include several
measures that
might capture
unintended
consequences.
Collecting Comparison Data

There are no definite rules for assessing gang problems. Generally, the
methods of information collection used in analysis can be replicated during assessment. Good analysis helps develop good responses, while good
assessment measures success. Unfortunately, analysis and assessment are
the most commonly ignored stages of problem solving. Valuable information about problems and effective responses to them is often lost simply
because assessments are not conducted.
Assessments need not be difficult. Collecting a handful of measures (perhaps four or five) from different vantage points should demonstrate that a
response eliminated or reduced the problem. Thus, a formal assessment of
a specific graffiti problem may include taking the following measurements
before and after the response is implemented:
Photographs of the marked surface.
A table reporting the frequency, size, and duration of graffiti. This
monitoring can be carried out before, during, and after the course of the
response, perhaps weekly.
A survey of area residents to determine any change in their level of
fear.
Statistics on sales or thefts of spray paint in area stores.
29
Retail sales figures of stores adjacent to the problem area.

Counts and descriptions of persons using public areas near the graffiti.
It is important to
take multiple
measurements
during an
assessment in
case some
measurements are
not sensitive
enough to
illustrate impact.
It is important to take multiple measurements during an assessment in

case some measurements are not sensitive enough to illustrate impact. For
example, a lag period often occurs in attempts to reduce fear of community
problems. It often takes time for people to become convinced that the
source of their fear will not return. Thus, the first two types of data mentionedphotographs and counts of frequency, size, and durationmay
become the most important (or only useful) measurements of impact. If a
group relies solely on surveys to measure fear, the disappointing results
might suggest that the response was ineffective. Clearly, the goals are to
achieve and to be able to claim success as a result of the groups efforts.
Regardless of the type of response implemented, the same assessment
techniques can be used to measure impact. For example, the previously
mentioned measures are appropriate for a paint-out program, a graffiti reporting hotline, or a recreational program that serves children (likely offenders) in the area near the graffiti; intensified police or citizen patrols;
increased lighting in the area; or a newly installed graffiti-resistant surface.
Assessing the effectiveness of the problem-solving effort emphasizes the
importance of developing clearly defined goals, thoroughly documenting
the entire process, and taking baseline measurements. In many cases, work
done on the project is not documented making it difficult to attribute any
impact to the problem-solving effort. Similarly, failure to measure the
magnitude of the problem before initiating a response makes it difficult
to prove conclusively that conditions improved after the response was
implemented.
30
Conclusion
This monograph has identified four barriers to addressing gang problemsdifficulties in defining gang problems, forming successful collaborations, discerning the difference between ends and means, and determining
impact. The Comprehensive Gang Initiative model provides a method for
overcoming those barriers. It is a dynamic, ongoing process that provides
guidance in examining a problem and finding out what factors allow the
problem to persist. Answering the questions raised by the model is essential in selecting appropriate responses to gang-related problems in
communities.
31
Appendix A
Bibliography
Blumstein, A., J. Cohen, J.A. Roth, and C.A. Visher. 1986. Criminal Careers
and Career Criminals. Vol. 1. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Bureau of Justice Assistance. Addressing Community Gang Problems: A Practical Guide. Monograph. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs. Forthcoming.
Churchman, C.W. 1968. The Systems Approach. New York: Dell.
Cohen, L., and M. Felson. 1979. Social Change and Crime Rate Trends: A
Routine Activity Approach. American Sociological Review 44 (August),
pp. 588607.
Eck, J.E. 1994. Drug Markets and Drug Places: A Case-Control Study of the Spatial Structure of Illicit Drug Dealing. College Park, MD: University of
Maryland.
Eck, J.E., and W. Spelman. 1987. Problem-Solving: Problem-Oriented Policing
in Newport News. Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum.
Felson, M. 1986. Linking Criminal Career Choices, Routine Activities,
Informal Control and Criminal Outcomes. In The Reasoning Criminal:
Rational Choice Perspectives on Offending, ed. Derek Cornish and Ronald V.
Clarke. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Goldstein, A.P., and C.R. Huff. 1993. The Gang Intervention Handbook.
Champaign, IL: Research Press.
Goldstein, H. 1990. Problem-Oriented Policing. New York: McGraw Hill.
Hirschi, T. 1969. Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Klein, M., and C. Maxson. 1989. Street Gang Violence. In Violent Crime,
Violent Criminals, ed. Neil Alan Weiner and Marvin E. Wolfgang. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Larson, R.C., and A.R. Odoni. 1981. Urban Operations Research. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Nelson, J.F. 1980. Multiple Victimization in American Cities: A Statistical
Analysis of Rare Events. American Journal of Sociology 85, pp. 870891.
Pierce, G.L., S. Spaar, and L.R. Briggs. 1986. The Character of Police Work
Strategic and Tactical Limitations. Boston: Center for Applied Research,
Northeastern University.
33
Sherman, L.W. 1987. Repeat Calls to Police in Minneapolis. In Crime

Control Reports, Number 4. Washington, DC: Crime Control Institute.
Spelman, W., and J.E. Eck. 1989. Sitting Ducks, Ravenous Wolves, and
Helping Hands: New Approaches to Urban Policing. Comment 35(2)
(Winter), pp. 19.
Spergel, I. 1991. Youth Gangs: Problems and Responses. Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 1991. Getting It Together:
Promoting Drug-Free Communities. Washington, DC.
Von Bertalanffy, L. 1969. General Systems Theory: Foundation, Development,
Applications. New York: George Braziller.
Weick, K.E. 1984. Small Wins: Redefining the Scale of Social Problems.
American Psychologist 39 (1), pp. 4049.
34
Appendix B
Sources for Further Information

For more information on the Comprehensive Gang Initiative, contact:
Police Executive Research Forum
1120 Connecticut Avenue NW., Suite 910
Washington, DC 20036
2024667820
Contact: John Stedman
For more information on community efforts to combat gang activity, contact:

Department of Justice Response Center
18004216770
Bureau of Justice Assistance Clearinghouse
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 208496000
18006884252
35
Appendix C
Problem-Solving Worksheet
This worksheet is only a guide. If answers are not available for all questions, you can use the
worksheet to brainstorm and stimulate thinking and understanding of the problem.
I.
List problems identified.
II.
Prioritize problems.
Assign priorities by numbering the above problems in order of importance. (The
frequency, duration, and severity of the problem as well as the number of persons
affected by the problem may also be used in ranking problems.)
37
III.
Select a specific problem.

The problem selected need not be the one listed as the most important in your
priority ranking. A less important, more manageable problem may be selected.
IV.
Frame the selected problem within the following statement.

(Victims) are (harmed) by the (behaviors) of (offenders) at (places) at (times).
Specify information for each parenthetical blank.
If all items in this statement cannot be specified, additional basic information about
the problem must be collected.
V.
Determine general goals of the problem-solving effort.

What would be the tangible effects in the community if the problem were removed?
38
VI. Analyze the problem.

1.
What is the harmful behavior caused

by the problem you selected in Section III?
a.
What harms are occurring?
b.
How is the harmful behavior carried out?
c.
How long does it take for the problem to occur?
d.
How often does it occur?
What are your sources

of information?*
*Sources of information include:

Surveys or interviews: of residents, victims, store clerks or managers, passersby, neighbors, offenders, police officers, detectives,
security personnel, parks and recreation personnel, and teachers.
Observations: look at the locations: record pedestrian and vehicular traffic counts; record demographic measures and activities of
persons in the area of the harmful behavior; measure lighting and ambient noise; count the incidence of litter, vandalism, graffiti,
abandoned cars, or other environmental features of the area.
Statistics: police incidence reports, calls for service, or other records; court records; school attendance records, including truancy and
suspension; sales receipts for businesses and sales of specific tools (such as spray paint).
39
1.
What is the harmful behavior? (continued)
e.
Are there secondary harms (for example, has business in

a store or a certain block declined because of robberies)?
2.
Who are the victims?
a.
What are their age, sex, race, appearance, size, dress,

and other shared features?
b.
Who could prevent the victims from being harmed

(guardians)?
c.
What tools could prevent the victims from being harmed?
d.
What are the victims involved in before and during the

harmful behavior?
40

of information?

of information?
2.
Who are the victims? (continued)
e.
How do the victims travel to and from the location of

the problem?
f.
Are victims alone or with others?
g.
Are there secondary victims of the harmful behavior?

If so, who are they and how are they harmed?
3.
Who are the offenders?
a.
What are the names, age, sex, race, appearance,

size, dress, and other shared features?
b.
What are the behaviors of offenders that are causing harm?

of information?

of information?
41
3.
Who are the offenders? (continued)
c.
What benefits do the offenders gain from their

harmful behaviors?
d.
What tools enable their harmful behaviors?
e.
What is the source of the tools? How are they obtained?
f.
How do the offenders travel to and from the location of the

problem?
g.
Who could prevent the offenders behaviors (controllers)?
42

of information?
3.
Who are the offenders? (continued)
h.
What activities are the offenders involved in before and

during the harmful behaviors?
i.
Do offenders act alone or with others?
4.
Who are the third parties?
a.
Who is responsible for overseeing the place where the

problem occurs (managers)?
b.
Are there other persons who use the location and may
observe the harmful behavior?

of information?

of information?
43
5.
What is the specific location of the problem?

Are there multiple locations?
a.
What tools (or lack of tools) at the location enable or

encourage the harmful behavior?
b.
What policies or practices enable or encourage the problem

to occur (for example, bus schedules, opening and closing
hours, plentiful seating, and playing of pleasant music)?
c.
What physical barriers are present or absent in the location

(for example, barriers to visual observation such as store
counters, walls, high shrubbery, or roadways)?
d.
What are the environmental conditions in the location

(for example, well-lit or dark area, outdoors or indoors,
heated or cooled, music or entertainment, benches that
encourage loitering)?
44

of information?
6.
When does this problem occur?
a.
At what times of day does the problem occur?
b.
On what days of the week does the problem occur?
c.
During what months does the problem occur?
d.
What environmental conditions exist when the problem

occurs (for example, dark or light and rain or clear)?
e.
What social conditions exist when the problem occurs

(for example, rush hour, school dismissal, or lunchtime)?

of information?
45
VII. Highlight the major or unusual findings in the analysis.

Look for innovative opportunities for intervention that show promise for
effectiveness.
VIII. Rewrite the problem statement.

Using information from Sections VI and VII, add more specific information:
(Victims) are (harmed) by the (behaviors) of (offenders) at (places) at (times).
Specify each.
46
IX.
Brainstorm responses.
List possible options for addressing the problem. Consider all options (even
outlandish ideas, such as tearing down a building or closing off a street).
Review all findings in the problem-analysis guide to suggest new responses.
Consider a wide variety of resources for assisting with the implementation of
the strategy.
47
X.
Develop strategies.
XI.
Evaluate your efforts.

Referring back to the general goals (Section V) and using the information from
problem analysis (Section VI), select four or five measures closely related to the
problem-solving strategies to show effectiveness. Remember, the assessment
should focus on the problem statement rather than on the response. This
evaluation should answer the following questions: Is the problem reduced or
eliminated? How can this reduction be documented? Are there fewer victims?
Is there reduced frequency of the problem?
48

Information
General Information
Callers may contact the U.S. Department of Justice Response Center for general information or specific needs,
such as assistance in submitting grants applications and information on training. To contact the Response Center,
call 18004216770 or write to 1100 Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20005.
Indepth Information
For more indepth information about BJA, its programs, and its funding opportunities, requesters can call the
BJA Clearinghouse. The BJA Clearinghouse, a component of the National Criminal Justice Reference Service
(NCJRS), shares BJA program information with state and local agencies and community groups across the
country. Information specialists are available to provide reference and referral services, publication distribution, participation and support for conferences, and other networking and outreach activities. The Clearinghouse can be reached by:
Mail
P.O. Box 6000
Rockville, MD 208496000
Visit
2277 Research Boulevard
Rockville, MD 20850
Telephone
18006884252
Monday through Friday
8:30 a.m. to 7 p.m.
eastern time
Fax
3015195212
Fax on Demand
18006884252
BJA Home Page

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA
NCJRS World Wide Web
http://www.ncjrs.org
E-mail
askncjrs@ncjrs.org
JUSTINFO Newsletter
E-mail to listproc@ncjrs.org
Leave the subject line blank
In the body of the message,
type:
subscribe justinfo
[your name]

Addressing Community Gang Problems A Model

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Addressing Community Gang Problems A Model

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

S

Office of Justice Programs

U.S. Department of Justice

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Bureau of Justice Assistance

U.S. Department of Justice